c2cthomas said:Hi Bob,
Thank you for clarifying - but I still want to try the Oscar Heil configuration with the cone facing upwards as well - just to see what it sounds like. I still have an untreated Pioneer to use in that manner - although I'll put BudP's EnABL pattern on it and leave the dome intact. It does mean that I may need to port the enclosure tho - but I'll go with a sealed version 1st.
Just doing what all good DIYer's do - fooling around with stuff!!
Ah yes the `ol Oscar Heil configuration. If you want to dink around you could also try the Oscar Meyer configuration. Ha ha.
You know. Dink/weiner.
Sorry. 
Hey it`s Friday the 13th.
Listening test of the Mamboni Walsh 5 Remakes -
This is a preliminary review of my build of Mamboni's Walsh5 remakes. My version is using a Heil AMT tweeter vs. Mamboni's dome tweeter but most other things follow his design.
As it stands right now I've only just installed a fresh Pioneer 10 inch mid-woofer atop my SonoTube base and I'll let it break in for 80 to 100 hours before getting down to some serious listening and adding some other tweaks. So this review is more of a first impression rather than the "full monty".
The first speaker to be compared with was this speakers original mate - a vintage ESS AMT2 purchased on eBay - one of which was munched by being dropped by the local delivery guy in the brown truck. I purchased the pair just for old times sake as I once lived in Sacramento Calif. where they were made and knew some of the guys that worked for ESS. The AMT 2's were never regarded as a "great" speaker - but they were ahead of their time and performed to a fairly decent level on the mid to high frequencies due to the Heil AMT tweeter. Most people that wanted some improvement in their fidelity would usually wind up reworking the xovers and putting in a decent woofer - and sometimes just taking the Heil and putting it on top of a well designed enclosure. That is pretty much what I had in mind when I discovered this thread and said to myself - "self - using a Heil tweeter with a Walsh like driver could be a bunch of fun".
Note: this Pioneer driver as modified by Mamboni isn't a true "Walsh driver" but it does have similar performance due to his felt triangles - see earlier post in this thread.
The Mamboni design - along with his triangles (which I call "Mamboni Magic"
) simply leaves the AMT2's so far in the dust that you'll need radar to find 'em! 
With no "box" to smear, distort, color, or otherwise mess with what the speaker cone is doing these speakers have an openness that I find pleasant and musical. Doing the A-B switching thing isn't fun for very long - sort of like watching your favorite team getting badly beat with only seconds left on the game clock.
The Pioneer 10 inch is fairly quick mid-bass unit that keeps up well with the Heil tweeter. There are better bass units (a bunch) around that do bass - but I haven't found any 10 inch woofers that will get up to 6k hz midrange as Mamboni uses in his design. The Heil AMT does a nice job on the top end - but you could use just about any decent tweeter and get good results with this design.
I soon tired of playing with the ESS unit (poor guy - future parts source for my next tweeter - the rest is scrap), and decided to A-B with my Fostex 167 full range monitors. No crossovers in these guys and I use them as a "base" with which to compare other speakers. These units are fairly good at what they do - and when mated with my sub-woofer perform well - I would rate them around a 7.5 to 8 on 10 scale. They did better than the AMT2's - but they still pretty much took 2nd place to the Mamboni design. Again - it's the "box" that cost them the contest - which took all of 5 minutes to conduct.
The Mamboni design - with all the speaker surfaces exposed directly to the open air - and not being constrained by an enclosure - offer a somewhat OB openness of sound and the Mamboni triangles do indeed seem to work on the Pioneer to keep it controlled and smooth.
I still have some things to look into concerning this design - such as BudP's EnABLE pattern - but I'm happy with the early results on what is little more than a raw test unit that is not fully broke in - let alone tweaked. I can't wait to finish building up the 2nd test unit. After playing around with things for awhile I'll settle in on a final design for my personal use and which I am sure will be a fine performing speaker. Will it be the best speaker ever made? That entirely depends on your taste in speakers.
One thing is for sure. For the cost involved ($200 - $400 for the pair - depending on selection of tweeters and finish) , the ease of construction, and the very sweet and open sound these speakers produce - it won't kill - but will seriously wound - the giants that cost one hell of a lot more. In fact it will slay quite a few of them IMHO.
This is a preliminary review of my build of Mamboni's Walsh5 remakes. My version is using a Heil AMT tweeter vs. Mamboni's dome tweeter but most other things follow his design.
As it stands right now I've only just installed a fresh Pioneer 10 inch mid-woofer atop my SonoTube base and I'll let it break in for 80 to 100 hours before getting down to some serious listening and adding some other tweaks. So this review is more of a first impression rather than the "full monty".
The first speaker to be compared with was this speakers original mate - a vintage ESS AMT2 purchased on eBay - one of which was munched by being dropped by the local delivery guy in the brown truck. I purchased the pair just for old times sake as I once lived in Sacramento Calif. where they were made and knew some of the guys that worked for ESS. The AMT 2's were never regarded as a "great" speaker - but they were ahead of their time and performed to a fairly decent level on the mid to high frequencies due to the Heil AMT tweeter. Most people that wanted some improvement in their fidelity would usually wind up reworking the xovers and putting in a decent woofer - and sometimes just taking the Heil and putting it on top of a well designed enclosure. That is pretty much what I had in mind when I discovered this thread and said to myself - "self - using a Heil tweeter with a Walsh like driver could be a bunch of fun".
Note: this Pioneer driver as modified by Mamboni isn't a true "Walsh driver" but it does have similar performance due to his felt triangles - see earlier post in this thread.
The Mamboni design - along with his triangles (which I call "Mamboni Magic"
) simply leaves the AMT2's so far in the dust that you'll need radar to find 'em! With no "box" to smear, distort, color, or otherwise mess with what the speaker cone is doing these speakers have an openness that I find pleasant and musical. Doing the A-B switching thing isn't fun for very long - sort of like watching your favorite team getting badly beat with only seconds left on the game clock.
The Pioneer 10 inch is fairly quick mid-bass unit that keeps up well with the Heil tweeter. There are better bass units (a bunch) around that do bass - but I haven't found any 10 inch woofers that will get up to 6k hz midrange as Mamboni uses in his design. The Heil AMT does a nice job on the top end - but you could use just about any decent tweeter and get good results with this design.
I soon tired of playing with the ESS unit (poor guy - future parts source for my next tweeter - the rest is scrap), and decided to A-B with my Fostex 167 full range monitors. No crossovers in these guys and I use them as a "base" with which to compare other speakers. These units are fairly good at what they do - and when mated with my sub-woofer perform well - I would rate them around a 7.5 to 8 on 10 scale. They did better than the AMT2's - but they still pretty much took 2nd place to the Mamboni design. Again - it's the "box" that cost them the contest - which took all of 5 minutes to conduct.
The Mamboni design - with all the speaker surfaces exposed directly to the open air - and not being constrained by an enclosure - offer a somewhat OB openness of sound and the Mamboni triangles do indeed seem to work on the Pioneer to keep it controlled and smooth.
I still have some things to look into concerning this design - such as BudP's EnABLE pattern - but I'm happy with the early results on what is little more than a raw test unit that is not fully broke in - let alone tweaked. I can't wait to finish building up the 2nd test unit. After playing around with things for awhile I'll settle in on a final design for my personal use and which I am sure will be a fine performing speaker. Will it be the best speaker ever made? That entirely depends on your taste in speakers.
One thing is for sure. For the cost involved ($200 - $400 for the pair - depending on selection of tweeters and finish) , the ease of construction, and the very sweet and open sound these speakers produce - it won't kill - but will seriously wound - the giants that cost one hell of a lot more. In fact it will slay quite a few of them IMHO.
Hi Bob!
1600 lbs I would not want to be the one to haul that load into the shop!! If we were closer I would of lent you the use of my Explorer.
At least you didn't wind up running into anything (it's hard to stop with that much weight on-board) and getting smushed up against the dash!
I was under the impression that 1600 lbs US is 725 kilo's CAN - how much is that in British Sterling?
I thought you folks north of the border were getting some nasty weather - no fun driving in that! One of the reasons I moved from Mass. to Calif.
1600 lbs
I would not want to be the one to haul that load into the shop!! If we were closer I would of lent you the use of my Explorer. At least you didn't wind up running into anything (it's hard to stop with that much weight on-board) and getting smushed up against the dash!
I was under the impression that 1600 lbs US is 725 kilo's CAN - how much is that in British Sterling?
I thought you folks north of the border were getting some nasty weather - no fun driving in that! One of the reasons I moved from Mass. to Calif.
Those 105AH, 12 volt batteries weigh 100 lbs each. That took the last of what energy I had for the day. I had help to load them but not to unload. Stuffed in every space available and on the seats trying to best distribute the load. This was my second trip of four expected. Good haul. I am building an E-motorcycle with four of them which ought to get me to town on windpower someday. I`m having fun learning PWM control and power MOSFETs right now as I try to make a DC traction motor speed controller. The rest of these batteries (about 60) will store and deliver alternate energy for the estate. storing wind power and electricity from WVO and whatever. Years of collecting bits and pieces here and there and building generators and stuff to eventually get off the grid.
Yes, would not want to have to stop or manouver quickly. The laws of physics are quite inflexible!
At $300 or so per battery new cost (X 64) that would have been quite a few pounds sterling. Fortunately my price was much more affordable. I was told they still have about 1/2 life left in them. Enough to run my 805 SET tube amp.
For content requirement, has anyone thought of trying to make a driver like the Ohm-A by making an aluminum cone from offset printing aluminum sheet? That stuff is pretty thin and a hard stiff alloy. I have some here I thought I might try if I can find a couple of suitable drivers (like 10 inch) to hack.
Yes, would not want to have to stop or manouver quickly. The laws of physics are quite inflexible!
At $300 or so per battery new cost (X 64) that would have been quite a few pounds sterling. Fortunately my price was much more affordable. I was told they still have about 1/2 life left in them. Enough to run my 805 SET tube amp.
For content requirement, has anyone thought of trying to make a driver like the Ohm-A by making an aluminum cone from offset printing aluminum sheet? That stuff is pretty thin and a hard stiff alloy. I have some here I thought I might try if I can find a couple of suitable drivers (like 10 inch) to hack.
Attachments
Maybe with some help from this guy you could make it with paper.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=99138 .
Personally, I am still happy with the Ciare HX201 facing the ceiling (just a little shout I have got used to).
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=99138 .
Personally, I am still happy with the Ciare HX201 facing the ceiling (just a little shout I have got used to).
Hi Bob,
In post #17 of "Why are the diaphragms of pro woofers always made of paper?" thread baseballbat points out study performed on metal cones. Very interesting study and worth some thought. I found that thread by reading Lynn Olsen's "Beyond the Ariel" thread and thoughts.
Being as you are a designer I know that you are aware that all materials used for speaker cone construction present their own particular set of "characteristics" such as resonance of the material used as well as the cone configuration, surround material and coupling method, etc. At the mid to high frequencies metals start to ring - and different metals will present a different tone at the same frequency - say a brass bell compared to bronze or copper. The same thing happens with the wood used in violins - and there such things as the varnish and shellac are used as a surface treatment to produce the "color" ("colour" for you chaps) of the instrument. Mamboni's triangles very much help to control this ringing in a controllable manner but they can only go so far - a bell will still sound like a bell - but it will be a controlled bell - depending on the number of Mamboni triangles applied - their size, location and material considerations etc. The point is that we have something to work with here - and that I believe can be developed to a higher level. Lynn Olsen has some thoughts about "Golden Ratio" triangles that need to be looked into and I'm thinking that as long as I'm playing around with Phi that the dimensions of the cone dimensions should follow the ratios of a Golden Triangle - and be used as a true "Walsh" driver. Treating the cone with BudP's EnABL pattern treatment to polish things off with and that should be one heck of a speaker!
Chinese has a great thread about his 14 inch full range speaker where he makes his own paper cones and I'm wondering what his methods combined with a natural long fiber material such a hemp would produce when combined with the stuff mentioned above.
Add a plasma tweeter and we are off to the races!! Hmmm - might as well toss in an Oskar Heil (back at cha - heh-heh) AMT in there somewhere just for SnG's!
I did a bunch of PWM stuff for controlling lighting dimmers used for stage lighting - and we were controlling lamps that had 2 KW bulbs in them. We used a micro processor to control things with (Mostek 6502 - back in the 70's) and triac's to control the AC. Just delayed the gating signal to the triac as to when it would pass current during the cycle - simple and works well - for AC tho.
What you need to come up with is a device (other than a dam) that will convert snow into a power source!! Ha-ha
I would like to work on a design that will convert all of the BS produced by politicians, news reporters, and TV ads into energy! Might need to break a couple of laws of physics tho - but there are some laws that just need changing!!
In post #17 of "Why are the diaphragms of pro woofers always made of paper?" thread baseballbat points out study performed on metal cones. Very interesting study and worth some thought. I found that thread by reading Lynn Olsen's "Beyond the Ariel" thread and thoughts.
Being as you are a designer I know that you are aware that all materials used for speaker cone construction present their own particular set of "characteristics" such as resonance of the material used as well as the cone configuration, surround material and coupling method, etc. At the mid to high frequencies metals start to ring - and different metals will present a different tone at the same frequency - say a brass bell compared to bronze or copper. The same thing happens with the wood used in violins - and there such things as the varnish and shellac are used as a surface treatment to produce the "color" ("colour" for you chaps) of the instrument. Mamboni's triangles very much help to control this ringing in a controllable manner but they can only go so far - a bell will still sound like a bell - but it will be a controlled bell - depending on the number of Mamboni triangles applied - their size, location and material considerations etc. The point is that we have something to work with here - and that I believe can be developed to a higher level. Lynn Olsen has some thoughts about "Golden Ratio" triangles that need to be looked into and I'm thinking that as long as I'm playing around with Phi that the dimensions of the cone dimensions should follow the ratios of a Golden Triangle - and be used as a true "Walsh" driver. Treating the cone with BudP's EnABL pattern treatment to polish things off with and that should be one heck of a speaker!
Chinese has a great thread about his 14 inch full range speaker where he makes his own paper cones and I'm wondering what his methods combined with a natural long fiber material such a hemp would produce when combined with the stuff mentioned above.
Add a plasma tweeter and we are off to the races!! Hmmm - might as well toss in an Oskar Heil (back at cha - heh-heh) AMT in there somewhere just for SnG's!
I did a bunch of PWM stuff for controlling lighting dimmers used for stage lighting - and we were controlling lamps that had 2 KW bulbs in them. We used a micro processor to control things with (Mostek 6502 - back in the 70's) and triac's to control the AC. Just delayed the gating signal to the triac as to when it would pass current during the cycle - simple and works well - for AC tho.
What you need to come up with is a device (other than a dam) that will convert snow into a power source!! Ha-ha
I would like to work on a design that will convert all of the BS produced by politicians, news reporters, and TV ads into energy! Might need to break a couple of laws of physics tho - but there are some laws that just need changing!!
Hello el' Ol,
Thank you for the feedback. I have been following the Chinese post with great interest - as have many others. I really like the way this guy thinks stuff up and then just goes and puts something together. Great creative mind - plus the ability to put things into action!
Do you know if the Ciare HX201 is available in the States or not? It looks like a speaker I would like to play with!
Of course I would wind up putting on Mamoni's triangles, BudP's EnABLE pattern and using it like the Pioneer 10 inch used in Mamboni's design. I'm amazed at what happens when the speaker is taken out of the enclosure and let sing into the open air from the "back side".
Thank you for the feedback. I have been following the Chinese post with great interest - as have many others. I really like the way this guy thinks stuff up and then just goes and puts something together. Great creative mind - plus the ability to put things into action!
Do you know if the Ciare HX201 is available in the States or not? It looks like a speaker I would like to play with!
Of course I would wind up putting on Mamoni's triangles, BudP's EnABLE pattern and using it like the Pioneer 10 inch used in Mamboni's design. I'm amazed at what happens when the speaker is taken out of the enclosure and let sing into the open air from the "back side".
Hi Ed,
Thanks for the questions - and they are very good questions. You are very much on the right track of things but I'm going to defer to BudP's knowledge on the subject because he is the wizard
(a humble one tho) that patented the EnABL design.
BudP's patent number is 5304746 and you can look it up at the patent office site. It explains several things - but Bud will be able to explain things better himself. Great stuff!
A friendly word of warning tho - when I visit the patent office web site I tend to get lost there for several hours at a time and my mind comes out full of mush and throbbing as if it was placed in a vice!
Almost all patents site other patents and I wind up going there to read stuff - and that patent will cite other patents - and I wind up going there! I have learned to stop at just three.
If you should not hear from me for days at a time have my wife tell me to get the hell off the patent site and come back down to earth!!
Lynn Olsen discusses baffle type stuff over on his thread - and does it like about a thousand time better than I can.
BTW - the age of the body has little to do with the age of the mind - just give it some good mental exercise and it can stay in fairly good shape for a looooog time!!
Thanks for the questions - and they are very good questions. You are very much on the right track of things but I'm going to defer to BudP's knowledge on the subject because he is the wizard
(a humble one tho) that patented the EnABL design.BudP's patent number is 5304746 and you can look it up at the patent office site.
It explains several things - but Bud will be able to explain things better himself. Great stuff! A friendly word of warning tho - when I visit the patent office web site I tend to get lost there for several hours at a time and my mind comes out full of mush and throbbing as if it was placed in a vice!
Almost all patents site other patents and I wind up going there to read stuff - and that patent will cite other patents - and I wind up going there! I have learned to stop at just three.
If you should not hear from me for days at a time have my wife tell me to get the hell off the patent site and come back down to earth!!
Lynn Olsen discusses baffle type stuff over on his thread - and does it like about a thousand time better than I can.
BTW - the age of the body has little to do with the age of the mind - just give it some good mental exercise and it can stay in fairly good shape for a looooog time!!
c2cthomas said:Hello el' Ol,
Do you know if the Ciare HX201 is available in the States or not? It looks like a speaker I would like to play with!
I know it was a problem to get the Ciare CH250 in the states, so probably also the HX201. In case you are going to order from overseas (e.g. Spectrumaudio), My design is: a 25x50x100cm folded TQWT, the driver on top on the side of the closed end. I also tried reflector cones (paper filled with PU mounting foam). It also works, but makes the spacial image flat compared to the ceiling as reflector.
regards, Oliver
Thomas,
Thanks for bumping me over to the patent site. I had to download a different ActiveX in order to print. I have a copy of the patent in hand now.
http://www.alternatiff.com/install/
BTW I'm listening to a pair of Lynn's ME2's that I built.
Bud,
I'm considering my options for the blocks...I'm a fool for wood...I'm concernerd that veneer (~0.020" or more?) might be too thick...and I wonder if sealer and lacquer would satisfy as a "conformal coating"...or is it too hard?
ahh...mental calisthenics...feel the burn!
Thanks for bumping me over to the patent site. I had to download a different ActiveX in order to print. I have a copy of the patent in hand now.
http://www.alternatiff.com/install/
BTW I'm listening to a pair of Lynn's ME2's that I built.
Bud,
I'm considering my options for the blocks...I'm a fool for wood...I'm concernerd that veneer (~0.020" or more?) might be too thick...and I wonder if sealer and lacquer would satisfy as a "conformal coating"...or is it too hard?
ahh...mental calisthenics...feel the burn!
Hi Bob,
...as an aside there is music and truth in what you share with us....and no lack of humor in the harsh reality we wrestle with, to wit:
I just love that.
I'm sorry I wasn't more clear expressing my interest in veneer. I envision rectangles of veneer attached to the raw wood of the baffle in the EnABL pattern. This followed by the application of a "normal" cabinet finish. I'm including in this the concern of a designer: whether to "hide or accentuate" the pattern. The veneer could be the same species as the baffle or chosen to offer a contrast.
My question was a suggestion (sorry again...no wonder it didn't translate) to substitute and apply an EnABL pattern made from wood rather than brushed on, and then apply the cabinet finish, hence my concern for the thickness of veneer exceeding what is appropriate for the pattern to be effective.
...as an aside there is music and truth in what you share with us....and no lack of humor in the harsh reality we wrestle with, to wit:
I just love that.
I'm sorry I wasn't more clear expressing my interest in veneer. I envision rectangles of veneer attached to the raw wood of the baffle in the EnABL pattern. This followed by the application of a "normal" cabinet finish. I'm including in this the concern of a designer: whether to "hide or accentuate" the pattern. The veneer could be the same species as the baffle or chosen to offer a contrast.
My question was a suggestion (sorry again...no wonder it didn't translate) to substitute and apply an EnABL pattern made from wood rather than brushed on, and then apply the cabinet finish, hence my concern for the thickness of veneer exceeding what is appropriate for the pattern to be effective.
Bud,
Out here in the country we find a thick and dense rubber matting called `cow mat` which is placed on the dirt floor in a barn to add some comfort for the critter1s feet. Cow Mat, about 5/8-3/4 inch thick, would also be a good thing to place on a concrete floor in front of an electrical work bench. I have looked at it with the idea of laminating it on the inside of a MDF speaker cabinet to act as dual layer vibration control. Maybe instead of what you went on to propose above it would be easier and almost as effective in practise to just cut an open baffle out of Cow Mat the shape of a large sunflower. Yellow paint optional. A triangular jutted edge is a proven method of reducing standing waves at the terminus of a surface. I have used it with great success to improve bandwidth and Z match (lower VSWR) in my microwave antenna work.
Yes, must figure out how to turn a snow drift into electricity.
Re: my moniker.....
I could have called myself ThomsonCSFvictim, but that is not nearly as clever or schmood, plus I saw that sham and have not allowed myself to actually become a `victim`. I like and continue to collect and be impressed with the stuff RCA developed in the `good old days` of vacuum toobz including a bunch of their fine 1940`s television receivers and 1950`s color television receivers (they effectively invented the NTSC system we use today). As an indefatiguable punster, in all the fractured manufacturer trademark and poroduct names I ever came up with and there were many, Black and Blacker, Hell and Bowel, Empirical Whip, etc., rcavictim was my fave.
Out here in the country we find a thick and dense rubber matting called `cow mat` which is placed on the dirt floor in a barn to add some comfort for the critter1s feet. Cow Mat, about 5/8-3/4 inch thick, would also be a good thing to place on a concrete floor in front of an electrical work bench. I have looked at it with the idea of laminating it on the inside of a MDF speaker cabinet to act as dual layer vibration control. Maybe instead of what you went on to propose above it would be easier and almost as effective in practise to just cut an open baffle out of Cow Mat the shape of a large sunflower. Yellow paint optional.
A triangular jutted edge is a proven method of reducing standing waves at the terminus of a surface. I have used it with great success to improve bandwidth and Z match (lower VSWR) in my microwave antenna work.Yes, must figure out how to turn a snow drift into electricity.
Re: my moniker.....
I could have called myself ThomsonCSFvictim, but that is not nearly as clever or schmood, plus I saw that sham and have not allowed myself to actually become a `victim`. I like and continue to collect and be impressed with the stuff RCA developed in the `good old days` of vacuum toobz including a bunch of their fine 1940`s television receivers and 1950`s color television receivers (they effectively invented the NTSC system we use today). As an indefatiguable punster, in all the fractured manufacturer trademark and poroduct names I ever came up with and there were many, Black and Blacker, Hell and Bowel, Empirical Whip, etc., rcavictim was my fave.
rcavictim said:Bud,
Re: my moniker.....
I could have called myself ThomsonCSFvictim, but that is not nearly as clever or schmood, plus I saw that sham and have not allowed myself to actually become a `victim`. I like and continue to collect and be impressed with the stuff RCA developed in the `good old days` of vacuum toobz including a bunch of their fine 1940`s television receivers and 1950`s color television receivers (they effectively invented the NTSC system we use today). As an indefatiguable punster, in all the fractured manufacturer trademark and poroduct names I ever came up with and there were many, Black and Blacker, Hell and Bowel, Empirical Whip, etc., rcavictim was my fave.
I own one of the late generation RCA 36" HDTV's - which although having crapped out in the analog-TV tuner section, displays 480i, 480p, and 1080i from the cable box just fine. (The TV is actually a giant multi-sync crt monitor, with the screen losing sync, blacking out and making a loud "clunk" when the sync rate is changed.)
What's really crazy is the corporate history - the set and the owner's handbook say "RCA", but it was made when Thomson CSF owned the brand. And of course Thomson is the French government-owned company that developed - wait for it - SECAM color, the notorious "System Against American Method" that is completely and totally incompatible with NTSC. (While by contrast the German Telefunken PAL system is an elegant refinement and further development of NTSC color.)
And just to mix things up even more, RCA was a prominent participant on the long-running ATSC effort to develop digital HDTV. Not that I can recommend buying one - although the color is nicer than Sony color (which seems to use non-standard phosphors and colorimetry), the reliability is nothing to write home about. But the monitor part of the set soldiers on, sharp and with good convergence, so I'm not planning on buying a 1080P microdisplay set any time soon.
Lynn,
Well if we didn`t get lucky once in a while life wouldn`t be much worth living now would it.
You mentioned colorimetry. RCA invented the tricolor kinescope tube and the first ones had phosphors that did the right colors. Unfortunately they weren`t all that efficient, the red being rather poor and consequently the electronics driving the red gun needed two triodes parallelled up to give that one gun more drive current. That gun would usually go flat before the other two rendering these CRT`s short lived. The colors had correct colorimetry however and the tube could reproduce a proper yellow (this seems to be a good test). The early correct but dim phosphors appeared in the 15GP22 (1954), 21AXP22 metal cone (1955) and finally the 21CYP22 (1957-1959?) CRTs. The last one was phased out in the very late 1950`s, replaced with a much brighter tube the 21FBP22 and shortly thereafter 21FJP22 (a 21FBP22 with a bonded safety glass). Although brighter by a large amount the colorimetry of the phosphors, particularly the red were slightly wrong. They won`t make a nice yellow. This tube was then used by all the TV manufacturers (RCA held the patent and issued liscenses) until the venerable 21 inch round color tube was replaced by the various rectangular tubes starting circa 1966/67. Since my vintage TV collecting ends with the last of the round CRT`s I don`t know what happened since. I have sets in my collection which use the first three color CRT`s but have only seen a color picture briefly on the 21CYP22 equipped set. I need to restore that one so I can really see what the proper colorimetry looks like.
I guess this went a bit off topic.
BTW, my apologies for the typos I did not catch like poroduct.
Well if we didn`t get lucky once in a while life wouldn`t be much worth living now would it.
You mentioned colorimetry. RCA invented the tricolor kinescope tube and the first ones had phosphors that did the right colors. Unfortunately they weren`t all that efficient, the red being rather poor and consequently the electronics driving the red gun needed two triodes parallelled up to give that one gun more drive current. That gun would usually go flat before the other two rendering these CRT`s short lived. The colors had correct colorimetry however and the tube could reproduce a proper yellow (this seems to be a good test). The early correct but dim phosphors appeared in the 15GP22 (1954), 21AXP22 metal cone (1955) and finally the 21CYP22 (1957-1959?) CRTs. The last one was phased out in the very late 1950`s, replaced with a much brighter tube the 21FBP22 and shortly thereafter 21FJP22 (a 21FBP22 with a bonded safety glass). Although brighter by a large amount the colorimetry of the phosphors, particularly the red were slightly wrong. They won`t make a nice yellow. This tube was then used by all the TV manufacturers (RCA held the patent and issued liscenses) until the venerable 21 inch round color tube was replaced by the various rectangular tubes starting circa 1966/67. Since my vintage TV collecting ends with the last of the round CRT`s I don`t know what happened since. I have sets in my collection which use the first three color CRT`s but have only seen a color picture briefly on the 21CYP22 equipped set. I need to restore that one so I can really see what the proper colorimetry looks like.
I guess this went a bit off topic.
BTW, my apologies for the typos I did not catch like poroduct.
C2C,
You are my number one go to guy, for how to do stuff, from now on. I would have just wadded ALL of the silk screen material up and sulked for a week.
When, and if, the EnABL thread comes online you will always get space to comment and ask difficult questions.
But, we are not done here just yet either, there is that Heil replacement you keep hinting about. A dome fully EnABLed or a cone upside down and EnABLed, from Chinese would be perfect. OR a Linnaeum dipole from Radio Shack with a Pioneer half can super tweeter on top.
All will integrate with that Walsh very nicely.
You may also find that your richest radiation pattern area problems are aided by the EnABL pattern, on the outside of the 10'.
Bud
You are my number one go to guy, for how to do stuff, from now on. I would have just wadded ALL of the silk screen material up and sulked for a week.
When, and if, the EnABL thread comes online you will always get space to comment and ask difficult questions.
But, we are not done here just yet either, there is that Heil replacement you keep hinting about. A dome fully EnABLed or a cone upside down and EnABLed, from Chinese would be perfect. OR a Linnaeum dipole from Radio Shack with a Pioneer half can super tweeter on top.
All will integrate with that Walsh very nicely.
You may also find that your richest radiation pattern area problems are aided by the EnABL pattern, on the outside of the 10'.
Bud
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.